VOlUME 05 ISSUE 06 JUNE 2022
1Edison Hutapea, 2Sri Desti Purwatiningsih
1,2Jl. Gatot Subroto, Kav. 97, Mampang Prapatan Kota Jakarta Selatan
Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT:
This paper aims to know and analyze self-concept in the interaction between students of the earth class of sons and ethnic Chinese in appreciating themselves. The self-concept possessed by ethnic Chinese, although positive, consciously and unconsciously, students seem to show a negative self-concept; as long as they show their self-concept, they want people to accept it. While appreciating themselves, the students of the earth class, the prince is more willing to show their concept of themselves, and they believe in themselves. They hope that there is a positive self-concept in the future so that ethnic interactions do not occur differences and conflicts between ethnicities in their friendships. This research uses qualitative research methods using symbolic self-concept and interactional theory. Data collection techniques with in-depth interviews and observations.
KEYWORDS:Self-Concept, Symbolic Interactional, Crosscultural Communication
REFERENCES
1) Arifin, Z. 2012. Evaluasi Pembelajaran. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
2) Berger, A,A. 2000a. Media Analisis Techniques. Second Edition. Ahlibahasa Setio Budi HH. Yogyakarta: Penerbitan
Universitas Atma Jaya
3) Creswell, J. W. 1996. Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. ( 1sr ed.) Thousands of Oaks:
Sage.
4) Effendy, O,U. 2007. Ilmu Komunikasi (Teori dan Praktek). Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
5) Featherstone, M, 2001, Postmodernisme dan Budaya Konsumen, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta
6) Gunarsa, S & Yulia. 2001. Psikologi Praktis Anak , Remaja dan Keluarga. Jakarta: Gunung Mulia.
7) Hartaji, Damar A. 2012. Motivasi Beprestasi Pada Mahasiswa Yang Berkuliah Dengan Jurusan Pilihan Orang Tua.
Universitas Gunadarma.
8) Herusatoto, B. 2000. Simbolisme Dalam Budaya Jawa. Yogyakarta: Hanindita Graha Widia.
9) Kriyantono, R. 2007. Teknik Praktis Komunikasi. Jakarta: Kencana Prenandan Media Group.
10) Liliweri, A. 2004. Dasar-dasar Komunikasi Antar Budaya. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
11) Littlejohn, S W, Foss, dan Karen A. 2009. Teknik Praktis Riset Komunikasi. Sidoarjo: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
12) Moleong, L, J. 2004. Metodelogi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
13) ________________. 2006. Metodelogi Penelitian Kualitatif, Edisi Revisi. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
14) Morrisan, MA. 2010. Psikologi Komunikasi. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.
15) Mulyana, D. 2001. Ilmu Komunikasi Suatu Pengantar. Bandung: Remaja Rosadakarya
16) _____________. 2003. Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Remaja Rosda Karya.
17) Nasution. 2009. Metode Research (Penelitian Ilmiah). Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
18) Nurhadi, Z,F. 2015. Teori-Teori Komunikasi: Teori Komunikasi Dalam Perspektif Penelitian Kualitatif. Bogor: Ghalia
Indonesia.
19) Papalia, D & Feldman, R.D. 2008. Human Development. Jakarta: Kencana
20) Purwasito, Andrik. 2003. Komunikasi Multikultural Cetakan 1. Surakarta: Muhammadiyah University Press.
21) Rakmat, J. 2001. Psikologi Komunikasi. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
22) ______________. 2005. Metode Penelitian Komunikasi. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
23) Setyosari, P. 2012. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan dan Pengembangan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
24) Djin, S,T. 2000. Sumbangsih Siauw Giok Thjan dan Baperki Dalam Sejarah Indonesia. Jakarta: Hasta Mitra.
25) Siswoyo, Dwi dkk. 2007. Ilmu Pendidikan. Yogyakarta: UNY Press.
26) Sobur, A. 2004. Semiotika Komunikasi. Bandung: Remaja Rosda Karya.
27) Soeprapto, R. 2002. Interaksionisme Simbolik. Malang: Averroes Press.
28) Sutopo, A H & Adrianus Arief, 2010. Terampil Mengolah Data Kualitatif Dengan NVIVO. Jakarta: Prenada Media Group.
29) Turner, S., & Allen, P. (2007). Chinese Indonesians in a rapidly changing nation: Pressure of ethnicity and identity. Diunduh
dari: http://ebscohost.com. Tanggal 10 Juni 2010.
30) Yusuf, S. 2012. Psikologi Perkembangan Anak dan Remaja. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.